Contact: John Clarke, Deputy Director of Children's Services, Tel 01962 846459
email: [email protected] or
Trevor Walker, Senior Inspector/Adviser (Primary), Tel 01962 846338

email: [email protected] or

Alan Rawlings, Senior Inspector/Adviser (Secondary), Tel 01962 846917
email: [email protected]

1 Summary

1.1 This report provides an overview of the performance of primary and secondary schools in Hampshire in terms of outcomes for children in national tests and examinations. The performance described is relative to contextual factors that compare children with those that are in similar settings. The report supports Aim 1 of the Corporate Strategy (maximising life opportunities) and the achievement of the 5 outcomes of the Children Act 2004. The achievement of children in national tests is an important indicator in assessing the extent to which learners' achievement and future economic wellbeing as defined in the Children Act are met.

2 Background

2.1 Local authorities (LAs) have historically received annual information about the performance of their schools primarily through DfES Performance Tables and data sets from Ofsted Performance and Assessment (PANDA) reports. Both of these sources of information compare school with school and LA with LA using standard indicators such as GCSE or Key Stage 2 (KS2) test outcomes. When Hampshire is measured against other LAs nationally using these indicators, its performance is above average.

2.2 The most recent Annual Performance Assessment (APA), by which the performance of LAs is now judged, covers a wider range of indicators; this includes the above measures. The only contextual comparator that the APA uses is in relation to statistical neighbours. This simply compares Hampshire with similar LAs using the usual national key stage test and examination data sets.

2.3 Schools are now receiving detailed value added measures that are increasingly detailed and describes the progress made by children from the end of one key stage to another (for example the end of KS1 to the end of KS2). This measure takes into account a range of school level and pupil level contextual information that could have an impact on progress, such as gender, month of birth, ethnic origin, special educational needs (SEN) and geo-demographic data (post-code).

2.4 However, the situation in KS1 is complicated, in that a value added measure cannot be applied as there is no objective base-line measure from when children start school. The Fischer Family Trust (FFT) have therefore provided a model that provides an estimate of what might be expected for a cohort of pupils to achieve, based on contextual data that includes the factors mentioned in paragraph 2.3 (above).

3 Primary Schools

3.1 Achievement in the primary years is good overall. KS1 results for reading, writing and mathematics are above average nationally and in line with statistical neighbours. At the end of KS2, 11 year olds do similarly well - above average nationally and also in the top 30% of statistical neighbours for all core subjects. Progress between KS1 and KS2 is slightly above the national average (when using prior attainment (PA) measures - no contextual considerations) representing a reasonable value added, especially when given the strong base at the end of KS1.

3.2 The LA's ambitious targets have not yet been met in KS2 mathematics, although the target has been exceeded in English. In all three subjects at KS2 Hampshire's results are better than the national average and above those for statistical neighbours. In English and mathematics, Hampshire's results rose more than the national average. In science, gains, from a high base, were in line with the gains nationally.

3.3 The FFT contextualised data shows that overall, pupils in Hampshire attain levels that are significantly higher than their contextual estimates. This is the case in reading, writing and mathematics at KS1, although not the case in writing and mathematics at level 3, which is significantly lower than contextual estimates.

3.4 Nevertheless, when using contextual value added between key stages 1 and 2, the picture is different. The number of pupils reaching level 4+ in English and mathematics was significantly lower than expected when compared with similar pupils nationally. In English the number of pupils reaching level 5 was not significantly different from all similar pupils nationally, although in mathematics the number was significantly lower. In science pupils reaching level 4 was in line with the expectations and those reaching level 5 was significantly higher.

3.5 Trend data (taking into account the last three years), shows the number of level 5 pupils in English is improving in relation to other LAs nationally. In science there has been rapid improvement overall, but especially in relation to the number of level 5s. This has not, so far, been reflected in mathematics to the same extent.

4 Secondary Schools

4.1 Every secondary school now receives from Ofsted its own contextual value added analysis for each key stage and also for KS2 to KS4 overall. The FFT analysis provides similar information but with additional data on, for example, how the performance of pupils at A*/A grades at GCSE compares with pupils having similar contextual data. Schools vary in the extent to which they are able to achieve similar value added at each key stage, as in-school circumstances can change from year to year. However, it is generally the case, as has been reported previously, that where there is variation, progress at KS4 is stronger than at KS3. Consequently it is the five year progress measure from KS2 to KS4 that provides the most useful overall analysis of a school's effectiveness.

4.2 Two key value added indicators are provided by the FFT - KS2 points to 5+A*-C grades at GCSE and to a capped points score. The latter is calculated by assigning a different points value to each grade at GCSE. An average is then found for the total points over the best eight results per pupil - hence the term `capped' points score. It is usually, but not always the case, that each of these indicators gives similar information about a school's value added performance between KS2 and KS4. Where there is a difference, value added calculated on the points score is statistically the most inclusive of the two indicators as this considers the performance of all pupils across all grades at GCSE and not just those pupils who attain 5+A*-C grades.

4.3 In 2005, and using DfES value added school performance tables, the performance of Hampshire secondary schools between KS2 and KS4 was ranked 8 amongst its statistical neighbours compared with rank 6 in 2004. This grouping is of eleven LAs similar to Hampshire and a ranking of 6 would be regarded as average performance. The overall performance of secondary schools is therefore broadly in line with statistical neighbours and this is the judgement in the APA.

4.4 The FFT value added analysis of each secondary school between KS2 and KS4 shows that 17% of secondary schools achieved above average, 46% achieved average and 37% achieved below average when their performance is measured against their capped points score. Whilst it is to be expected that there will be a range of outcomes, the proportion that is below average is too high.

4.5 These results reveal a wide range of value added performance. For example, the 17% of schools include 5 that lie in the top 10% nationally whilst the 37% include 6 that lie in the bottom 10%. However, the most significant statistic is that of these 26 schools where value added is below average, only 7 schools have 5+A*-C results, more than 10 points lower than the LA average for 2005. In other words, the majority of disappointing value added outcomes are from schools that generally achieve around the LA average, or higher.

5 Implications

5.1 The contextual value added data for KS1 to 2 shows that some schools need to improve the progress that their pupils are making. Our additional data indicates that there is a particular need in years 3 and 4, where the progress is slower. The primary strategy has been addressing this issue by interventions in the schools where the need is the greatest. During the coming year we are identifying, using contextual performance data, the underperformance of individual pupils in all primary schools. This will ensure that we are able to address these needs, even if the number is not represented as a high percentage of the overall pupil number in our larger schools. Furthermore, this data will form a focus for the work of our new School Improvement Partners (SIPs) in primary schools (from January 2007).

5.2 The contextual value added data for secondary schools show that performance at GCSE and value added overall will improve if more average performing schools achieve better value added outcomes than currently. This is consistent with outcomes from the monitoring of the success of schools in meeting their performance targets. It is generally those schools with average (and below average) attainment that need to be more successful in meeting the expectations that they set themselves. Consequently, the work of the School Improvement Service is being reshaped to address this priority through the deployment of secondary consultants and the support of SIPs.

6 Legal implications

6.1 None

7 Financial implications

7.1 None

8 Personnel implications

8.1 None

9 Impact assessment

9.1 Race and equality impact assessment has been considered in the development of this report and no adverse impact has been identified.

10 Crime prevention issues

10.1 None

11 Views of the Local County Councillor

11.1 Not sought in the drafting of this report.

Recommendation

1 That this report be noted.

Section 100D Local Government Act 1972 - Background Documents

The following documents disclose facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, is based and has been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of this report.

NB The list excludes:

1 Published works

2 Documents which disclosed exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act

None